看到一句話，覺得蠻有道理的。
一个国家，一个民族，乃至每个个人，我们所取得的真正的成绩和荣耀，都是通过科学手段达成的事实成果。
人类最大的大是大非，就是讲究科学和事实。
我加上一句：
無論用什麼”大是大非”來否定科學和事實，是對此”大是大非“本身的否定。更精確地說，是對那”是“的部分的否定。
Category: 三言兩語
-
大是大非
-
初衷
已故政治領袖，在百年前的主張和初衷就一定是正確的？世界是一直在向前發展不是？但是，是不是過時了，也不一定。需要有權威性的解釋。
我看到一本官方出版的《毛澤東早期文稿》。其第五百三十頁的文章是曾經登載在上海《時事新報》副刊上的一篇表示政見的文章。
文章的題目是《反對統一》，主張各省自決自治。當天是雙十國慶，他老人家也不忘添上一句他“老不高興他”。
要提倡初心、初衷的人，一定不會違逆他的意思把的反統一論當成分裂主義來批判吧。那麼怎麼解釋才能說得通呢？
-
兩回事
每個民族的人，大致上都認爲自己這個民族有值得感到自傲的地方。
但是，民族有強弱。歷史上有欺凌其他民族的，也有受其他民族欺凌的。但是，畢竟歷史是過去的事。現代，如果有一個民族欺凌其他民族，世界輿論會一致譴責。
現今，儘管各個國家的制度不同，但是在國際上的行爲，有大多數國家公認的規則要遵循。不能因爲以前曾受到欺凌，現在就可以欺凌他國。
堅持不按規則行事的少數國家，正在或將會受到大多數國家的制裁。這和國家的當權者在其內部是如何向其子民們解釋，受不受到擁護，是兩回事。
一句話，自有公論。
-
出發點是好的
有一個哲學家曾說：
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that, in the process, he does not become a monster. If you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
或許，你仔細想一想，就知道我爲啥要引這段話。我儘量說得簡短些：
一些同胞在這些天裏受到過一些非常“離譜”的對待，就是這句話的寓意的體現。當然，這是對那些在執行層層加碼的措施的各級幹部而言的。
只是用出發點是善良的來解釋恐怕是不夠的。
歷史上已經發生過多少，”出發點是好的“，人爲的災難。和魔鬼戰鬥的”英雄“，也能變成魔鬼的！
-
陽光普照
今天聽到新聞，現任總統大人得了covid-19。他不僅見陽，並有溫和的病症。他說他能繼續工作，並開始用口服藥（Paxlovid）。 這種對Omicron有一定效果的藥，現在可以憑醫生處方就能得到了，而並非特供少數權貴。我真心希望他像前總統那樣很快就沒事了。
我沒有時間去看那些愛“國”紅粉們的歡呼雀躍的場景。但是我可以想象。從“戰狼”們以往的表現來推算，他們的表演一定和小紅粉們一樣。
西方政要見陽的還真不少。起碼讓人覺得這到處普照的陽光並沒有因爲他們的地位而漏掉他們。這和有密不透風的“閉環”保衛的那些領導人是無法相比的。
但願世界上得病的人，平民也好，高官也好，都能很快痊癒。
-
關於病毒蔓延的書
我正在讀醫學記者Debora Mackenzie的書《Covid-19…》，讀了有三分之一了。
現在這類書出版了不少。有好幾本我有計劃要讀。
這是一本用通俗的語言寫的，牽涉到許多大家都需要知道的醫學知識和Covid-10蔓延的書。
我一邊讀，一邊在想，現在的社交媒體上太多的有關這個題目的“信息”當中，（這裏我用了引號），“譁衆取寵”的、甚至假的太多了，所以，有內容的書更是非常需要多讀一點。
我和許多人一樣，知識很淺薄，有關醫學方面的知識尤其缺乏。但是，只是承認自己不足顯然是不夠的。要下決心並立即着手充實自己。俗話說：活到老，學到老。我想要當好一個老學生，（我有點像是在發誓），希望在老年健康，病毒蔓延等方面能知道什麼才是真知。
這是應該是長進的開始。
注：
Debora MacKenzie began her career as a biomedical researcher and has been a science reporter for the past thirty-six years, mostly for the British magazine New Scientist, and among other things has specialized in infectious disease. For years she has been reporting scientists’ increasingly urgent warnings that humanity is at risk of a pandemic. A Canadian, MacKenzie currently lives in France, just across the border from Geneva, Switzerland.
-
手法
或許，這是一些人喜歡並慣用的手法，大家已經見怪不怪了。
對於“新聞”報道，如果對真實性有懷疑，還是要查出處，盡量找原文看或者可靠的新聞來源。
最近的一個例子在這裏。
這段講話，有關原文是：
“I chaired a commission for the Lancet for two years on Covid. I’m pretty convinced it came out of US lab biotechnology — not out of nature — just to mention after two years of intensive work on this,” Sachs said during a global conference organised by Spanish globalisation think-tank Gate Centre.
“So it’s a blunder in my view — of biotech — not an accident or natural spillover.”
其實，他並沒有說病毒是美國實驗室泄漏的。US lab bio-technology 和 US bio-technology lab 意思是不同的。前者是指美國的生物實驗室技術，而後者才是美國的生物實驗室。大家知道，當時研究有關病毒的實驗室，有美國的一個，和由美國部分資助的武漢研究所。至於，究竟病毒是從哪裏泄漏的，他這段話並沒有特別指出。
-
Timeline
如今人們的忘性，和我自己的忘性比，大概只能說大同小異。
一個明顯的例子是東航那架在廣西失事的客機。都快不記得了吧。Marc Siegel 醫生的這本書裏，有一段，列出了2020年初發生的一系列事情。
如果，大家天天都關注那些傳來傳去的“新奇”的消息，那麼前兩年發生的事，恐怕也被忘得差不多了吧。
Check out this timeline:
January 14: Tweet from WHO citing Chinese health officials who claimed there had been no human transmissions of the novel coronavirus within the country yet.
January 21: According to German intelligence sources, per the newspaper Der Spiegel, Director Tedros received a call from Chairman Xi of China urging him to delay warning the world and to conceal evidence of person-to-person transmission of the novel coronavirus.
January 23: WHO Director General Tedros issued a statement that the novel coronavirus was a regional problem only.
January 28: After meeting with Chairman Xi, Tedros gushed that “it is admirable that the Chinese government has shown its solid political resolve and taken timely and effective measures in dealing with the epidemic.”
January 30: Tedros said, “the Chinese government is to be congratulated for the extraordinary measures it has taken. I left in absolutely no doubt about China’s commitment to transparency.” Tedros added that they had set “a new standard for outbreak response.”
February 3: After visiting Beijing, Tedros continued to praise Chairman Xi’s commitment to stopping this outbreak. He also said it was okay to go on with international travel and trade (President Trump was restricting travel from China since January 31) Meanwhile, Chairman Xi was banning internal travel from Wuhan, yet allowing international travel to Europe where the coronavirus quickly spread.
February 7: Dr. Li Wenliang, age 34, opthalmologist in Wuhan, died of coronavirus. Warning in a chat room post on December 30th of the new virus, saying it resembled Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), he was visited by the police and forced to sign a statement denouncing his warning as an unfounded and illegal rumor.
February 10: Tedros, “But for now, it’s only a spark.”
February 15: Munich securities conference: Tedros, China’s attempt to control this outbreak has “bought the world time.”
March 7: The WHO was still not calling it a pandemic—Public health officials in the U.S., including me, were already calling it a pandemic.
March 11: WHO finally called it a pandemic. A University of Southampton study suggested that China could have reduced the number of coronavirus cases by 95 percent had they moved to contain it just three weeks earlier.
May 14: Dr. Ren Minghui, Assistant Director-General of the WHO in charge of Communicable Diseases, had been a public health official in China for 30 years—tweeted that the “COVID-19 pandemic is highlighting the need to urgently increase services for #MentalHealth or risk a massive increase in mental health conditions in the coming months.”
作者評論道：
I responded on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News that though I completely agreed with this sentiment, on the other hand, had the WHO done what they were supposed to do and warned us rather than aiding and abetting the spread of the virus around the world, perhaps we wouldn’t be in such mental health trouble with enormous damage to the world’s psyche.